Disposed

Nss Karayogam Puthanvelikkara Reg No. 1598 v. the Superintendent of Police

Kerala HC25 Jun 2020WP(C)/10434/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court addressed a writ petition seeking police protection for an ad hoc managing committee facing alleged threats by rival members. Finding that the dispute regarding management rights was a civil matter already pending in a civil court, the court refused to continue the interim police protection order, directing the parties to seek specific relief in the pending civil proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed, and the petitioner was directed to approach the Munsiff Court (where a civil suit is pending) via an interlocutory application for police assistance if a breach of the in

Nss Karayogam Puthanvelikkara Reg No. 1598 Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 4TH ASHADHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

NSS KARAYOGAM PUTHANVELIKKARA REG NO. 1598 PUTHANVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, P.V.SASEENDRAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, 61 YEARS, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, PUTHANVELIKKARA.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALUVA RURAL, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683101

¶11

2 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-683101

¶12

3 STATION HOUSE OFFICE, PUTHANVELIKKARA POLICE STATION, PUTHANVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-683101

¶13

4 M.K.MADHUSOODANAN, MUNDAPPILLY HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA KARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISGTRICT, PIN-683594

¶14

5 N.R.AJAYAKUMAR S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, NAROOR PUTHENVELIKKARA KARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683594

¶15

6 K.P.ROOPESH, S/O.PEETHMBARAN, KOLATTU HOUSE, PUTHANVELIKKARA KARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PN-683594

¶16

7 SARATHKUMAR S/O.RAGHU, THAZHATHE VEEDU, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683594

¶17

8 ANILKUMAR, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, NAROOR, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683594

¶18

R4-6 BY ADV. SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER R7-8 BY ADV. SRI.M.G.JEEVAN

¶19

BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIMAL K.NATH

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

¶22

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioners in the Writ Petition state that they are the ad hoc Managing Committee of the NSS Karayogam, Puthanvelikkara. In the Writ Petition, it is their case that while the original Managing Committee consisted of 15 members, in 2017, 9 members resigned, and consequently, the Registrar of NSS Karayogam took over the administration and appointed an ad hoc committee of 9 persons by an order (Ext.P1 dated 30.01.2018). While this committee functioned till February 2020, it was re-constituted by Ext.P1(a) order on 12.02.2020 and the reconstituted committee is stated to be continuing as such today.

¶25

It is the case of the petitioner that on account of interference from persons, including the contesting respondents herein, it was constrained to file O.S.No.63 of 2018 before the Munsiff Court, North Paravur, in which I.A.No.318 of 2018 was filed seeking an injunction to restrain respondents 3 to 8 from obstructing the functioning of the office of the Karayogam. The injunction sought for by the petitioner was granted to a limited extent, in that, while the prayer for restraining the respondents from obstructing the functioning of the office of the Karayogam was granted, the further prayer for preventing the respondents from entering into the religious and educational institutions under the Karayogam was refused. Ext.P2 is the order of injunction

¶26

¶27

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶28

granted by the Munsiff Court, North Paravur, in O.S.No.63 of 2018. Although an appeal was preferred against the said order by the respondents, the same came to be dismissed by Ext.P3 order. It would appear that no further proceedings were carried against Ext.P3 order, and hence, Ext.P2 order of injunction continues to be in force as against the respondents. It is also apparent that the petitioner preferred another I.A, namely, I.A.No.1088 of 2018 seeking police assistance in enforcing Ext.P2 order. The said I.A was, however, dismissed by Ext.P4 order, wherein the court below found that the averments in the I.A were vague in that, it did not specify the persons who had breached the terms of Ext.P2 order as also did not specify the exact nature of the breach allegedly committed by the said persons. Against Ext.P4 order, the petitioner has preferred O.P.(C).No.1561 of 2018, which is pending before this Court. In the meanwhile, the petitioners had approached this Court through W.P(C).No.16063 of 2018 seeking police protection to protect the rights granted to them through Ext.P2 injunction order. The said Writ Petition was however withdrawn subsequently presumably because at that time the petitioner had not approached the civil court for implementing Ext.P2 order.

¶29

The petitioner has since approached this Court through the present Writ petition stating that the respondents 4 to 8 continue to

¶30

¶31

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶32

interfere with the functioning of the office of the Karayogam and the prayer sought is for police protection for the life of the petitioner against the threats allegedly meted out to them by the said respondents.

¶33

When the matter came up for admission before this Court on 27.05.2020, this Court while ordering notice before admission to the respondents, granted an interim order of police protection for the life of the petitioners, as prayed for. Thereafter, counter affidavits were filed by respondents 4 to 6 and respondents 7 and 8. In the said counter affidavit, although there is a reference to the earlier Writ petition preferred by the petitioners for police protection as also to O.P(C).No.1561 of 2018 that is pending before this Court, the gist of the contentions taken in the counter affidavit is that, inasmuch as this is a civil matter and there are various issues that have to be dealt with on facts after adducing evidence, to determine the inter se rights of the parties, to the management of the Karayogam, this Court ought not to upset the status quo through any order of police protection granted to one side in preference to the other. In the reply affidavits filed by the petitioner to the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents, although there is a mention of various attempts by the respondents to challenge the constitution of the ad hoc administrative committee, and the fact that those attempts were dismissed by the Munsiff Court, North Paravur through Ext.P2 order, the petitioner does not deny that there is

¶34

¶35

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶36

a civil dispute pending between the parties with regard to their inter se right to manage the NSS Karayogam at Puthanvelikkara.

¶37

I have heard Sri.V.M.Krishnakumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Sreelal N.Warrier, appearing for respondents 4 to 6, Sri.M.G.Jeevan the learned counsel appearing for respondents 7 and 8 and the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents of the State.

¶38

While this Court had granted an interim order of police protection to safeguard the rights of the petitioner as declared in Ext.P2 order of injunction as affirmed by Ext.P3 order in appeal, the averments in the counter affidavits and reply affidavits filed by the parties clearly reveal that there are factual disputes as regards the alleged obstruction caused by the respondents. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it would be prudent to relegate the petitioner to the civil court, viz. the Munsiff Court, North Paravur where O.S.No.63 of 2018 is pending, to seek orders of police protection to safeguard the rights that have been determined, as an interim measure, through Ext.P2 order of the said Court. This is more so because the pleadings before me also indicate that an earlier attempt of the petitioner at obtaining police assistance for implementing Ext.P2 order was unsuccessful, and pursuant to the judgment of this Court the petitioner had approached the

¶39

¶40

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶41

civil court for an order of police assistance in implementing Ext.P2 order. When the civil court did not grant them the relief prayed for, they approached this Court through O.P.(C).1561 of 2018, which is currently pending.

¶42

It has to be borne in mind that the order impugned in the said O.P(C) found that the petition filed by the petitioners for police assistance was vague in its description of the acts of the respondents that constituted the alleged breach of Ext.P2 order. A similar situation arises in the instant case where there is no clarity as regards the acts that allegedly constituted a breach of Ext.P2 order of the court below. It is also brought to my notice by the learned counsel for respondents 4 to 6 that under the cover of the police protection order granted by this Court, which was essentially for protection of the life of the petitioner, the petitioner broke open a lock that was fixed on a door to the office of the NSS Karayogam and school on 09.06.2020. This submission of counsel for the respondents is endorsed to a limited extent by the averments in the statement of the Station House Officer, Puthanvelikkara Police Station, who states that pursuant to the order of this Court, the ad hoc committee members opened the door and took over the charge and occupied the office of the NSS Karayogam, Puthanvelikkara on 09.06.2020. The concern expressed by the learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 6 is essentially that, this act of the petitioner, under

¶43

¶44

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶45

cover of the police protection order, might prejudicially affect the claim of the respondents in the pending suit before the Munsiff Court, Noth Paravur.

¶46

Taking note of the aforesaid facts, as also the concern expressed by the learned counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that it would be prudent for this Court to not continue the police protection order, and to relegate the petitioner to the remedy of approaching the civil court, namely, the Munsiff Court, Paravur, where O.S.No.63 of 2018 is pending, to move the said civil court through an interlocutory application in the event of any breach by the respondents of the terms of Ext.P2 order. The petitioner can, in that event, bring to the notice of the said court the specific acts of the respondents, which constitute a breach of Ext.P2 order, and seek the assistance of police for implementing the terms of the said injunction order.

¶47

I, therefore, close this Writ Petition by relegating the petitioner to the Munsiff Court, North Paravur for moving an Interlocutory application if required in O.S.No.63 of 2018 pending before that court. If the petitioner moves such an Interlocutory Application within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, then the Munsiff Court, Paravur, shall endeavour to consider the application for police assistance within a further period of two weeks from the date of the

¶48

¶49

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶50

receipt of the Interlocutory Application from the petitioner. While considering such applications on merits, the Munsiff Court, North Paravur, shall also bear in mind that the action of the petitioner in opening the door and taking charge and occupying the office of NSS Karayogam on 09.06.2020 shall not be seen as having been authorised by this Court, through the police protection order, and the legality of the said actions shall be independently determined by the Munsiff Court, North Poaravur, while deciding on the entitlement of the petitioner for police assistance as also the issue as to whether or not there was any breach occasioned by the respondents of the directions in Ext.P2 order. The Munsiff Court shall also bear in mind that merely on account of the dismissal of an earlier application (I.A.No.1088 of 2018 through Ext.P4 order), there cannot be a presumption that there are no new circumstances that call for the consideration of a fresh petition for police assistance at the instance of the petitioner.

¶51

Taking note of the apprehension of the learned counsel for the respondents, it is also made clear that the liberty to approach the civil court is not restricted to the petitioner alone, and should the respondents approach the Munsiff Court, Noth Paravur, with an Interlocutory application in O.S.No.63 of 2018, seeking a restitution of the factual situation that obtained prior to 09.06.2020, when the adhoc committee members opened the door and took charge of the office of the

¶52

¶53

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶54

NSS Karayogam, Puthanvelikkara, then the Munsiff Court shall consider the said application also on merits, after hearing the parties.

¶55

As regards the police authorities, it is made clear that in the event of any law and order situation arising in the area they shall promptly attend to the same without deciding the civil dispute pending between the parties and solely with a view to quell the law and order situation that may arise in the area.

¶56

The writ petition is disposed as above.

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶59

mns

¶60

¶61

WP(C).No.10434 OF 2020(D)

¶62

APPENDIX

¶63

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶64

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 30.01.2018 OF REGISTRAR OF NSS KARAYOGAMS
EXHIBIT P1(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO KR1598/698/605/2020 DATED 12.2.2020 THE REGISTRAR OF NSS KARAYOGAMS
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.318/2018 IN OS NO.63/2018 DATED 13.04.2018
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CMA NO.26/2018 OF THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE NO.PARAVUR DATED 26.06.2019
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.1088/2018 IN OS NO.63/2018 DATED 06.05.2018
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY PUTHANVELIKKARA POLICE STATION DATED 20.09.2019
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CR.NO.130/2020 OF PUTHANVELIKKARA POLICE STATION
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDERS 1 TO 3 ON 17.03.2020
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8/3/2018 IN IA 293/2018 IN OS NO.59/2018 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT NORTH PARAVUR
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY PANKAJAKSHAN THE THE MANAGER OF MANNAM MEMORIAL N.S.S. ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL,
	PUTHANVELIKKARA DATA 13/8/2002

Nss Karayogam Puthanvelikkara Reg No. 1598 v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nss Karayogam Puthanvelikkara Reg No. 1598 v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

St. Peters College Trust Vs the State of Kerala

Mohanan Nair.P Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Remya Viswanath Vs the Superintendent of Police

Indus Towers Limited Vs the District Collector

Rejith Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Suresh R., Vs the Special Tahsildar (Lr)